Posted on 09/28/2009 9:46:05 AM PDT by nickcarraway
Yesterday, Public Policy Polling released results of a poll showing that 42 percent of Republicans nationwide do not believe Barack Obama was born in the United States. This sort of statistic has become old news by now. Despite overwhelming evidence that the president was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born citizen, a core of Americans remain convinced he was born overseas.
But with pollsters frantically trying to get in on the birther action, has anyone stopped to ask whether Sen. John McCain was born in the United States? McCain was actually born in Panama, but is considered a natural-born citizen, since he was born to an American military family stationed on a U.S. base. And, except for perhaps a small fringe, no one has questioned whether he would have been constitutionally qualified to be president.
We've poked around a bit and been unable to find any professional poll that asked Americans whether they believed McCain was born in the U.S. The fact that he was physically born outside the U.S. should have had no bearing on his own legitimacy, real or perceived, had he been elected president. But it would be interesting to see how many of the people who believe, incorrectly, that Obama was born outside the U.S. realize that McCain actually was not.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.newsweek.com ...
Where in there is the definition of "natural born citizen"???
The whole system of decisions applicable to this subject rests on the law of nations as its base. It is therefore of some importance to inquire how far the writers on that law consider the subjects of one power residing within the territory of another, as retaining their original character or partaking of the character of the nation in which they reside.
Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says
"The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights."
"The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are strangers who are permitted to settle and stay in the country. Bound by their residence to the society, they are subject to the laws of the state while they reside there, and they are obliged to defend it because it grants them protection, though they do not participate in all the rights of citizens. They enjoy only the advantages which the laws or custom gives them. The perpetual inhabitants are those who have received the right of perpetual residence. These are a kind of citizens of an inferior order, and are united and subject to the society, without participating in all its advantages."
Now you coud say that Marshall had not read his Blackstone, but it seems unlikely.
I find it supremely appropriate that while Benedict Arnold used "Blackstone" as his one of his "book ciphers in communicating with John Andre his "handler" while Ben Franklin used "Law of Nations" as his book cipher when communicating with Dumas an American Supporter in the Netherlands (Dumas also was the one who invented the cipher system used).
A law cannot define a Constitutional term, only a Constitutional amendment can do that.
Federal law does not make an exception for those outside the country serving the county. What is does is define persons born outside the country to any two citizen parents as citizens, or with more limitations, even those with only one citizen parent.But of course those are statutory citizens, not 14th amendment or natural born citizens
I highly doubt Congress would ever pass such a law, anyway For one thing, Vattel and the various court cases favorably citing "Law Of Nations", would be brought up, and it would be argued that such a law would be unconstitutional. In the current environment, the Congressmen could expect to to not survive (politically) their next election.
But, in the absence of a such a statutory exemptions for citizenship of person's not born in the US, such as have existed since 1790, yes I would argue that Vattel was the understood meaning of Natural Born Citizen, and thus of one category of citizen.
But the court has agreed with Vattel by using his work as authority for the meaning of Constitutional and other legal terms. In this case "natural born citizen. See "12 U.S. 253", "The Venus", which I've linked above.
I bet if (God forbid!) McCain was elected, you’d be first in line challenging his legitimacy.
To defend your guy in the White House, you lie about McCain, as you well know that the hospital you claim McCain was born in wouldn’t be built until he was six years old.
You misrepresent US v. Kim Wong Ark, despite having been on several threads where this was discussed, and proven irrelevant to the situation of the current occupant of the White House.
You'd lose that bet, because I voted for the guy (while holding my nose, of course).
To defend your guy in the White House,
He's not my guy, and I defy you to find a single instance in which I defend him. Shooting down nonsensical conspiracy theories about his eligibility is not the same thing as defending him. For the record, I believe he is the worst president since FDR.
you lie about McCain,
No. It is you who are mistaken.
You misrepresent US v. Kim Wong Ark,
On the contrary. It is you who have done so. You are projecting.
despite having been on several threads where this was discussed, and proven irrelevant to the situation of the current occupant of the White House.
LOL. So a case dealing with natural born citizenship is irrelevant. I guess anything can be true in the fantasy world that you and your fellow birthers occupy.
I can relate. I got talked out of voting for the black AMERICAN guy (Keyes) at the last minute.
“...travels to Pakistan at a time when US passport holders could not travel there.”
This is another birther myth.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Say what? What is this myth of which you speak?
So you say ...
PS: What is the pertinence of your earlier Hawaii reference??
You claim McCain status a myth? McCain is NOT a natural born citizen. He was born in a foreign country. PERIOD. The citizenship of his parents, their being in the military, or being in the canal zone, DOES NOT MAKE MCCAIN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. He was born in a foreign country. He was not born in the canal zone. (not that it makes any difference, canal zone never was U.S. soil) The panama canal treaty EXCLUDES U.S. jurisdiction in Colon, Panama where McCain was born. He WAS NOT born on a military base. (not that it would matter, nor being born in a foreign embassy matters).
At least McCain is a citizen. Obama probably is NOT.
Look this stuff up before you spout off making a fool of yourself.
You claim McCain status a myth? McCain is NOT a natural born citizen. He was born in a foreign country. PERIOD. The citizenship of his parents, their being in the military, or being in the canal zone, DOES NOT MAKE MCCAIN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. He was born in a foreign country. He was not born in the canal zone. (not that it makes any difference, canal zone never was U.S. soil) The panama canal treaty EXCLUDES U.S. jurisdiction in Colon, Panama where McCain was born. He WAS NOT born on a military base. (not that it would matter, nor being born in a foreign embassy matters).
At least McCain is a citizen. Obama probably is NOT.
Look this stuff up before you spout off making a fool of yourself.
Apuzzo is all wet here. Scotus has ruled on this natural/foreign law stuff.
Don't keep the citations to yourself.
Chief Justice Non-Sequitur has RULED. What a moron you are.
Natural Born Citizen is a special class of citizen at birth applying specifically to the President being Command and Chief. There is NO QUESTION about this. That is why that term is used in Article II. As others point out, people reference natural born citizen all the time when it doesn't actually appear in the item they reference. Or they reference some judge, or some non binding Senate resolution where it's use is in error and or misapplied. The founding fathers wrestled with the office of president and his power as Command in Chief. That is why (John Jay letter) they settled on a special category of citizen for that post allowing for NO FOREIGN ALLIEGENCE of any kind. Try reading the 5000 Year Leap for starters Mr. Non-Sensical. There are many good videos on the founding as well.
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/
spend a few days researching
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2306351/posts?q=1&;page=10451
you’ll have to search through this thread I don’t remember exactly where, but it was discussed at length
Vattel's "Law of Nations", where the "citizen parents and born in the country" idea comes from, disagrees. In section 217 of the Law of Nations, he says those serving outside the country in the "armies": Law of Nations § 217. Children born in the armies of the state.
For the same reasons also, children born out of the country, in the armies of the state, or in the house of its minister at a foreign court, are reputed born in the country; for a citizen who is absent with his family, on the service of the state, but still dependent on it, and subject to its jurisdiction, cannot be considered as having quitted its territory.
Section 212 is where that original "Natural born citizen" definition comes from. Basically the "exemption" is the same one as that in the 14th amendment. "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" language, only applied not to representatives of foreign governments in the US, but rather representatives of the US government in foreign lands.
There was an older, smaller facility on the Coco Solo base prior to the one built in '42.
PS: He can simply release his passport (& birth, & school) records and then perhaps we shall know the truth ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.